What did I learn from this action research?
From this action research, I learned how to teach writing in a style that matched my personality. I had seen so many great teachers teaching writing, but I needed a style to match students' needs and the way I taught. Additionally, before I conferenced with students, I would teach a mini-lesson to the entire class. During some of these mini lessons, I used an anchor chart or mentor text that would further my students' understanding of sentence fluency, word choice, and conventions. When it was time to conference with my students, I was able to refer back to the anchor chart or mentor text. I found this to be a helpful strategy in conferencing because when I referred back to what I had taught in the mini-lesson I was able to build on students' prior background knowledge. Moving forward in teaching, I would like to use more mentor texts and anchor charts during my whole group mini-lessons and then refer back to them in my writing conferences with students.
How has research impacted my teaching?
Research has shown me that I need to break down the teaching of writing and focus on the little concepts with my students rather than the big picture. For example, at the beginning of the year I expected my students to be able to write a paragraph that made sense. After the research, I now know that this needs to be broken down. I need to teach my students how to write a sentence first in order to piece them together into a paragraph. Furthermore, this research has also has shown me how to differentiate my teaching in writing, and that not every second grader has the same needs in writing. This is important because each child is unique and has his or her own set of strengths and areas for growth. I now know I cannot teach two children the same way in writing. Through research, I have learned the value of breaking writing down and differentiating instruction.
How has the research impacted my growth as a professional?
As a professional, I now see students as individual writers rather than a class of writers. I realize that each student has their individual set of needs that I must meet. Although I taught mini-lessons to the whole class, I worked individually with students on those skills during their conference time. I also allowed the students' writing to drive what I taught. I found that it is best to go into individual conferences and let the students lead the conversation and to then work on what the student needs to work on.
If I were to repeat this project, I would like to teach conventions before sentence fluency. Students need the basic foundation of a sentence before they can work on strengthening other pieces of writing. I also would give my assessment based off of a different topic. The students had to write the assessment in a narrative form. During the study, we worked on nonfiction, letters, poetry, and opinion writing. Due to the fact that we did not cover narratives during the course of the study, I feel that this may have affected some of my students' post assessments, and it may not have been the most accurate assessment. I wish I would have focused the post assessment on a genre that we worked on throughout the course of the study. In order to strengthen the study, if I were to repeat it, I would have changed the order of some topics, and made changes to the assessment topic.
If I were to repeat this project, what would I change?
What will I do next year?
Next year, I want to start having writing conferences with my students right away. I will work with students to build up their stamina in writing. Additionally, we will work to create procedures and routines during writing block. Before starting this project, I spent a lot of time managing behaviors during writing. I always tried to conference with students, but I spent my time trying to get students on task. Upon starting this project, I knew I needed to have procedures and routines set with clear expectations. Once setting these and rehearsing these, behavior was less of a problem in my classroom. Next year, I will be sure to set the procedures and routines from the start of the year. Furthermore, I will teach writing mini-lessons that focus on improving the six traits of writing. This could include using mentor texts and anchor charts. I will then reinforce these mini-lessons through writing conferences. After seeing the improvement that my students made because of writing conferences, I know that writing conferences are a successful strategy for my classroom. Next year, I will use writing conferences, as well as clear expectations and routines, and mini-lessons based around the traits of writing.
Although I have learned so much, one thing I learned from this research was the importance of data collection. Through data collection, I was able to see the growth of my students' writing. I was able to see that what I was teaching my students was paying off. Additionally, I was able to see the students who were not making adequate progress. After this study, I know that I may need to make alternative interventions for these students. This may involve talking with other staff members in the building or reading research from our field to see how to better assist these students. In future years, I would like to collect data frequently in order to ensure my students are growing at adequate rates.
What impact will the research have on future teaching?
How did my strategies align with best teaching practices advocated by educational associations?
Teaching associations advocate for the individual needs of students. By meeting with each student weekly, I was able to look at each student individually and make instructional decisions based on each individual and the group needs of the students in my classroom.
How did my strategies relate to the 21st century skills?
My strategies related to 21st century skills in a variety of ways. Critical thinking is a 21st century skill. Through conferences, I was able to ask students questions that allowed them to use critical thinking skills to respond to the question. Furthermore, collaboration is a key 21st century skill. While I was only able to meet with students once a week, we utilized peer conferences where students worked together to help each other create the best possible pieces. Critical thinking and collaboration are two key 21st century skills that I was able to use throughout the project.
My strategies related to the Five Core Propositions in different ways. Proposition One states that teachers are committed to students. By meeting with each student I was not only committing to their academics, but I was committing to the student as a person. The conferences gave me time to get to know each student better. Additionally, Proposition Two states that teachers know their subject. Through this, I had to do a lot of outside research on my curriculum and strategies to improve writing. Furthermore, Proposition Three lists that teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning. Through the use of assessments and field notes, I was able to have up to date data on my students and their progress. The Fourth Proposition states that teachers think systematically on their practice. I did this all throughout the process but especially when looking at what assessments to give. I was going to give my students a pre, mid, and post assessment. However, after four weeks of conferences, I felt like my students needed more time in conferences in order to show growth so I decided to only give a pre and post assessment. This shows that I was able to make a systematic decision that drove my instruction. Lastly, Proposition Five lists that teachers are members of a learning community. I showed this by reaching out to other professionals and other resources to make my writing conferences the most successful experience for my students. Throughout this process, I related my strategies to the Five Core Propositions.
How did my strategies relate to the Five Core Propositions?
Anchor Chart used to teach conventions
